and Ibn Jurayj is more reliable than Muʿammar, so the connected [chain] is preferable were it not for the ʿanʿanah [ambiguous transmission], but the ḥadīth is authentic due to its supporting evidences. Among them is from ʿĀʾishah (raḍiya Allāhu ʿanhā) who said: The Messenger of Allāh (ṣallá Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-sallam) said: "Indeed, those who cut down the lote trees will have molten [punishment] poured over their heads in the Fire." Narrated by al-Ṭaḥāwī (4/117), al-Khaṭīb in "al-Mūḍiḥ" (1/38-39), and al-Bayhaqī (6/140) through two chains from Wakīʿ ibn al-Jarrāḥ who said: Muḥammad ibn Sharīk narrated to us from ʿAmr ibn Dīnār from ʿAmr ibn Aws from ʿUrwah ibn al-Zubayr from her. I said: Its isnād is authentic; its narrators are trustworthy, the narrators of the two Shaykhs [al-Bukhārī and Muslim], except for Muḥammad ibn Sharīk, and he is trustworthy. As for al-Bayhaqī's criticism, quoting Abū ʿAlī al-Ḥāfiẓ, saying: "I do not think he preserved it from Wakīʿ, and they have spoken about him, meaning al-Qāsim ibn Muḥammad ibn Abī Shaybah, and the preserved narration is that of Abū Aḥmad al-Zubayrī and those who followed him in his narration from Muḥammad ibn Sharīk from ʿAmr ibn Dīnār from ʿAmr ibn Aws from ʿUrwah that the Messenger of Allāh (ṣallá Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-sallam) [narrated] as mursal." I said: This criticism is not detrimental because al-Qāsim did not uniquely narrate it from Wakīʿ, rather he was followed by Malīḥ ibn Wakīʿ ibn al-Jarrāḥ as we indicated, and he is trustworthy. Therefore, al-Khaṭīb said after narrating al-Dāraquṭnī's statement: Wakīʿ uniquely narrated it from Muḥammad ibn Sharīk and Malīḥ uniquely narrated it from him: "I said: And thus did al-Qāsim ibn Muḥammad ibn Abī Shaybah narrate it from Wakīʿ." And al-Khaṭīb said subsequently: "And Abū Muʿāwiyah narrated it from Abū ʿUthmān Muḥammad ibn Sharīk, so he narrated it as mursal and did not mention ʿĀʾishah. He informed us...." I said: It appears from what we mentioned that the most authentic [narration] from Muḥammad ibn Sharīk is mursal, but it is mursal with an authentic isnād, so it is, in any case, a strong supporting evidence for the ḥadīth of the chapter, especially since Ibn Sharīk was followed in connecting it,